Anyone with a basic knowledge of politics can recognize that an issue deemed “plain and simple” never actually is. For some unapparent reason, politicians remain loyal to this failed rhetorical tactic, as if its cliché justification will elicit public acceptance. However, this pathetic excuse for an explanation never works and there is no reason to think this time will be an exception as Republicans use it in an attempt to shoot down the current proposal to extend partner benefits to University of Wisconsin employees.
State Republicans are apparently limited not only in the political language they use, but also in what they understand. In an effort to deny UW employees the partner benefits provided by every other Big Ten university, these joint-committee members are invoking the stale language of budget shortfalls. These representatives would like UW students and faculty to believe that their discriminatory denial of employment benefits to a small group of UW staff is all in the name of fiscal responsibility, but Wisconsin students and residents know better.
Here is the evidence to prove it in language that everyone can speak and understand: money.
The UW System’s budget has created a large stir at the Capitol and caught the attention of the press and public alike. The budget’s components are often of astronomical proportion and cause taxpayer eyes to roll and tuition-payer eyes to widen. With Gov. Jim Doyle’s recent budget demanding almost $150 million ($49 million from state funding and $100 million from tuition increases), this year is no exception. In light of these daunting figures, any rational individual would seek to shave off unnecessary expenditures where possible, but this tiny piece of the budget is too modest and too integral to consider cutting. The partner-benefit budget addition is perfectly reasonable. The governor claims that the entire program will cost only $1 million. That constitutes about a meager 1 percent of Doyle’s two-year budget increase. Although only a small portion of the budget, these partner benefits constitute a large part of the university’s employment appeal, or lack thereof.
The commitment to academic quality is one on which politicians, taxpayers and students agree regardless of whether they trumpet the state institution of same-sex marriage or proclaim the necessity of a constitutional amendment against it. Wisconsin graduates, students and residents all brag about the academic superiority of our beloved university, so we should all be concerned that our bragging rights can easily be stripped if we allow this subtle discrimination to continue.
UW chancellors have increasingly been complaining that they are having a hard time retaining faculty because salaries lag behind those at comparable universities. UW-Madison is especially feeling this strain as it has seen the largest increase in outside offers to its professors. In 2004, UW-Madison professors received 98 offers from other universities and colleges. Almost half of these offers were accepted. As any employer knows, one way to guarantee employee loyalty in the face of larger salary opportunities is to offer great benefits packages that show faculty they are valued and guaranteed good health care and financially stable retirements.
These benefits must be guaranteed to all employees in order to retain faculty and a bigger-picture commitment to UW’s non-discriminatory practices. There are some politicians like Joint Finance Committee chair Dean Kaufert who justify the continued denial of benefits by pointing out that only a few UW-Madison staff members vacated their positions explicitly citing a lack of domestic-partner benefits as their primary reason. However, the draw to other institutions will diminish for homosexual employees and sympathetic co-workers if UW-Madison can adhere to the long-standing Equal Opportunity Employment statement, which promises that “the administration, faculty and staff of UW-Madison are committed to and reaffirm support of the principle of equal employment.” If this is to remain true, partner benefits should be extended as soon as possible.
Clearly the debate concerning the extension of partner benefits is neither plain, nor simple. Wisconsin politicians, UW faculty, the Board of Regents and even students must take a complicated budget, confusing faculty retention considerations and moral dilemmas all into account when deciding whether or not these benefits should assume a place in the school’s employment practices. My hope is that they will realize this is a small price to pay for ensuring the academic quality of which UW is so proud. Extending partner benefits is the right thing to do and for once, it is also a financially easy option — a win-win possibility on which we would be foolish not to capitalize.
Sarah Howard ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in political science.
